1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. All costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) on December 11, 2008, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 7 million to the account in the name of Defendant B at the request of Defendant B; (b) on May 28, 2010, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,260,000 to Defendant B with a credit card; (c) on December 7, 2010, the Plaintiff lent each of the above money to Defendant B by transferring KRW 6 million to the account in the name of Defendant B at the request of Defendant B; and (d) on July 28, 2009, the Defendants, who are the couple, will be jointly liable. Accordingly, the Plaintiff granted KRW 10,000 to Defendant C a KRW 1,100,000 cashier’s checks.

Therefore, the payment of the loan amounting to KRW 2,426,00 and damages for delay is claimed against Defendant B, and the payment of the loan amounting to KRW 10 million and damages for delay is claimed jointly with Defendant C.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no dispute between the parties as to the fact that there was a receipt of money but the loan was lent is proved by the burden of proof on the Plaintiff who asserted that the loan was lent.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221 Decided December 12, 1972; 2014Da26187 Decided July 10, 2014, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 72Da26187, Dec. 12, 1972

The Plaintiff transferred KRW 7 million to the account in the name of D on December 11, 2008; the Plaintiff delivered cashier’s checks to Defendant C on July 28, 2009; the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,260,000 to Defendant C with Defendant B, etc. on May 28, 2010; the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,260,000 for alcoholic beverages by credit card; and the Plaintiff transferred KRW 6 million to the account in the name of E on December 7, 2010 to the account in the name of E does not conflict between the parties; or it is recognized by the purport of each entry and all pleadings in subparagraphs 1 through 4, and 6.

However, in addition to the money issued by the above cashier's checks, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants received it, and the following is recognized by the partial entry of the evidence No. 9 and the purport of the entire pleadings.